But the attainment of this end depended upon the susceptibility of the hearers. So far
as they hungered for true spiritual food, so far as the parable stimulated them
to deeper thought, and so far only, it revealed new riches. Those with whom this
was really the case were accustomed to wait until the throng had left their Master,
or, gathering round him in a narrow circle, in some retired spot, to seek clearer
light on points which the parable had left obscure. The scene described in Mark,
iv., 10, shows us that others besides the twelve apostles were named among those
who remained behind to ask him questions after the crowd had dispersed. Not only
did such questions afford the Saviour an opportunity of imparting more thorough
instruction, but those who felt constrained to offer them were thereby drawn into closer fellowship with him. He became better
acquainted with the souls that were
longing for salvation.

The greater number, however, in their stupidity, did not
trouble themselves to penetrate the shell in order to reach the kernel. Yet they
must at least have perceived that they had understood nothing; they could not learn
separate phrases from Christ (as they might from other religious teachers) and
think
they comprehended them, while they did not. And so, in proportion to the
susceptibility of his hearers, the parables of Christ revealed sacred things to
some and veiled them from others, who were destined, through their own fault, to
remain in darkness. The pearls, as he himself said, were not to be cast before
swine. Thus, like those “hard sayings”156156John, vi., 60. which were to some the
“words of Life,” and to others an insupportable “offence,” the parables served to sift and purge the throng of Christ’s hearers.

A single example will bring this vividly before us. On a certain occasion, when
Christ had pronounced a parable, and the multitude had departed, the earnest seekers
after truth gathered about him to ask its interpretation.157157Luke, viii., 10; Mark, iv., 11. He expressed his gratification
at their eagerness to
104learn the true sense of his words, and said: “Unto you it is given158158I. e., they followed the inward
“ drawing of God
(John, vi., 44, 45), and thence became susceptible of Divine impressions.to know the mysteries of the kingdom of
God, but to others in parables [without the explanations that are given to
susceptible minds], that they may see with their eyes, and yet not see; that they
may hear with their ears, and yet not hear.” There is here expressed a moral necessity,
a judgment of God, that those who were destitute of the
right will (on which all depends, and without which the Divine “drawing” is in
vain), could understand nothing of the things of the Lord which they saw and heard.
So long as they remained as they were, the whole life of Christ, according to the
same general law, remained to them an inexplicable parable.159159 According
to Mark and Luke, the disciples asked of Christ the meaning of the parable; according
to Matthew (xiii., 10), they inquired
why he spoke to the multitude in parables.
In Luke there is only an allusion to Isai., vi., 9; in Matthew the passage is cited
in full. In both respects the statement in Mark and Luke seems to be the more simple
and original. The apostles had more reason to ask the meaning of the parables than
to find out Christ’s motive for uttering them; yet as Christ, in reply, did state
that motive, it was perhaps implied in the question. The full quotation of the passage
in Isaiah was a natural change, and accorded with Matthew’s habit. The connexion
is well preserved in Matthew, and the difference between his statement and the others
is merely formal; nor is there the slightest ground to suppose that the author of
Matthew simply worked out Mark’s account or some other which lay before him. It
goes on naturally thus: in answer to the question why he spoke to the multitude
in parables, Christ replied (v. 11), that it was not given to them, as to the disciples,
to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; the reason,
founded in their moral dispositions, is stated in v. 12;
and then, in v. 13, the
Divine sentence, that “on account of their stupidity he spoke to them only in parables.” There is nothing inconsistent here,
nor is any arbitrary procedure attributed to
Christ; for, in fact, the parables served to veil as well as to reveal; and they
did the one or the other, according to the moral disposition of those that heard
them. It is worthy of remark,
that “the others,” with whom Luke contrasts the inquiring disciples, are styled
by Mark (iv., 11) “those that are without.” The simplest way to interpret this phrase
is to apply it to those who did not enter to ask a solution of what they had not
understood; it may mean those who were outside of the narrower fellowship around
Christ; but in either sense the result is the same.160160 Whatever may have been the original expression of Christ in this passage,
the fact that Luke speaks of “mysteries” in the plural, and Mark of “mystery” in
the singular, contributes, at any rate, to its elucidation. We have here another
proof that the germs of Paul’s teaching are to be found in the discourses of Christ:
this passage contains Paul’s whole doctrine of tire relation of the natural mind
to the knowledge of Divine things; e. g., 1 Cor.. ii. 14.

“The mystery,” in the passage
above quoted, is something hidden from men of worldly minds; incomprehensible to
them, and to all who are excluded, by their spirit and disposition, from the kingdom
of God. And this is the case with all truths that relate
to that kingdom, however simple and clear they may seem to those whose inner life
has made them at home in it.

After Christ had explained the parable to his disciples,
he took occasion,
105from this particular case, to impress
upon them the general lesson that every thing depended on the spirit in which they
received his words. He came not (he told them) to hide his light, but to enlighten
the darkness of men. It was his calling to be the Light of the world (Mark, iv.,
21). (He spoke in order to reveal the truth, not to hide it.) The truth which he
had obscurely intimated was to unfold itself for the instruction of all mankind
(v. 22; cf. John, xvi., 25).
Yet the organs who were destined to unfold it must have “hearing ears” (v. 23). And he proceeds (v. 24),
“Take heed, therefore, what
ye hear (be not like the stupid multitude, who perceive only the outward word);
and unto you that hear shall more be given (my revelations to you will increase
in proportion to the susceptibility with which you appropriate the truths which
I have intimated).” And he concludes with the general law,161161Mark, iv., 25; Luke, viii., 18;
Matt., xiii., 12. “Whosoever has—in reality
has—whosoever has made to himself a living possession of the truths which he has
heard, to him shall more be ever given. But he that has received it only as something
dead and outward, shall lose even that which he seems to have, but really
has not.”162162 I must hold ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχειν
to be the true reading of Luke, viii., 18, in spite
of what De Wette says to the contrary.
His knowledge, unspiritual and dead, will turn out to be worthless—the shell without
the kernel.

Some have supposed that these words (v. 25) were merely a proverb of
common life, of which Christ made a higher application. But the proofs that have
been offered163163 Conf. Wetstein on Matt., xiii., 12. in favour of the existence of such a proverb are by no means to the
point; and, in fact, it would be hardly true applied to temporal possessions, for
the poor man can increase his small store by industry and prudence; and the rich,
without those qualities, may soon lose his heaped-up treasures. The saying is fully
true only in an ethical sense; it speaks of moral, and not material possessions.
Applied, however, as a proverb, it must refer, not to mere possession, but to property
held as such, and can only mean that he who holds property, as his own, will not
keep it as dead capital, but gain more with it; while he, on the other hand, who
does not know how to use what he has, will lose it. Thus understood, the words are
not only fully applicable to the special case before us, but also to manifold relations
in the sphere of moral life.

The apostles had as yet, in their intercourse with
their Master, received but little; but that little was imprinted on their hearts.
They did not, like the multitude, receive the word only by the hearing of the ear,
but made it thoroughly and spiritually their own. And thus was laid within them
the foundation of Christian progress.

158I. e., they followed the inward
“ drawing of God
(John, vi., 44, 45), and thence became susceptible of Divine impressions.

159 According
to Mark and Luke, the disciples asked of Christ the meaning of the parable; according
to Matthew (xiii., 10), they inquired
why he spoke to the multitude in parables.
In Luke there is only an allusion to Isai., vi., 9; in Matthew the passage is cited
in full. In both respects the statement in Mark and Luke seems to be the more simple
and original. The apostles had more reason to ask the meaning of the parables than
to find out Christ’s motive for uttering them; yet as Christ, in reply, did state
that motive, it was perhaps implied in the question. The full quotation of the passage
in Isaiah was a natural change, and accorded with Matthew’s habit. The connexion
is well preserved in Matthew, and the difference between his statement and the others
is merely formal; nor is there the slightest ground to suppose that the author of
Matthew simply worked out Mark’s account or some other which lay before him. It
goes on naturally thus: in answer to the question why he spoke to the multitude
in parables, Christ replied (v. 11), that it was not given to them, as to the disciples,
to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; the reason,
founded in their moral dispositions, is stated in v. 12;
and then, in v. 13, the
Divine sentence, that “on account of their stupidity he spoke to them only in parables.” There is nothing inconsistent here,
nor is any arbitrary procedure attributed to
Christ; for, in fact, the parables served to veil as well as to reveal; and they
did the one or the other, according to the moral disposition of those that heard
them.

160 Whatever may have been the original expression of Christ in this passage,
the fact that Luke speaks of “mysteries” in the plural, and Mark of “mystery” in
the singular, contributes, at any rate, to its elucidation. We have here another
proof that the germs of Paul’s teaching are to be found in the discourses of Christ:
this passage contains Paul’s whole doctrine of tire relation of the natural mind
to the knowledge of Divine things; e. g., 1 Cor.. ii. 14.